Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
I wonder if these guys even consider Lu playing great for the next 6 seasons @ 5.3m? I guess he could fall apart at some point but that would be a far cry from how his career has gone to this point. Luongo hasn't posted a save % lower than .913 since his rookie season. The last 10 years would have looked a lot different for the Leafs with that kind of goaltending.
I wonder if these guys even consider Lu playing great for the next 6 seasons @ 5.3m? I guess he could fall apart at some point but that would be a far cry from how his career has gone to this point. Luongo hasn't posted a save % lower than .913 since his rookie season. The last 10 years would have looked a lot different for the Leafs with that kind of goaltending.
I agree. The contract does have some risks especially in year 5 and 6. But people are focussing too much on the risks and ignoring the huge positives IMO. You get a player for the next 4 years at least who is a great number one goalie and the price is likely affordable in terms of what you have to give up. You take the risk in years 5 and 6 of the contract that you pay a high salary to a goalie who may have declined somewhat. After years 5 and 6 the risks are basically all with Vancouver. Not a bad deal overall and a heck of a lot better than most of the deals we see handed out at the trade deadline or in free agency. Add to that the fact that no one else is available with similar skills and I think that a smart GM who has a need in net will jump at this.
If Vancouver was on the hook for Luongo's cap hit for the remaining years after his retirement I would be much more inclined to give Vancouver fans closer to what they were looking for in the hundreds of threads littering these boards.
Pretty much eliminates the financial risk most Toronto fans were hesitant about.
The clause was clearly put in to deter teams from striking these "wink wink" retirement deals (aka cap circumventing deals) with players.
I really wish this "retirement in 6 years" would die as an argument considering it's based on nothing but fantasy and wishful thinking.
Agreed though it is funny that now Vancouver wants luongo to play every second of that deal so they don't get screwed with a big cap hit from a guy who left town years ago.
I really wish this "retirement in 6 years" would die as an argument considering it's based on nothing but fantasy and wishful thinking.
Except for the fact that Luongo said he would likely not play out the contract.
As well from Puckdaddy:
"Luongo, 33, has 10 more years at $5.33 million annually against the cap left on his contract. (Please note, however, that the last three years of that deal total $3.618 million in salary, which is a polite way of saying Luongo will retire in 2019 if not sooner.)"
But what if Luongo blows the over $100 million he makes in his career on poker or maybe becomes a drug addict? Then that $1 million will help buy the groceries. Believe it or not I've heard that one a couple of times.
I really wish this "retirement in 6 years" would die as an argument considering it's based on nothing but fantasy and wishful thinking.
You have to admit that it is at least a plausible scenario based on his contract structure. I don't really expect Hossa to hang around and play for $1 million when he's 38+ either.
If Vancouver was on the hook for Luongo's cap hit for the remaining years after his retirement I would be much more inclined to give Vancouver fans closer to what they were looking for in the hundreds of threads littering these boards.
Pretty much eliminates the financial risk most Toronto fans were hesitant about.
The clause was clearly put in to deter teams from striking these "wink wink" retirement deals (aka cap circumventing deals) with players.
I disagree. I think the clause was added to punish teams who signed players to these cap circumventing deals during the last CBA. The cap circumventing contracts made Bettman look foolish. Now he's getting his revenge.
You have to admit that it is at least a plausible scenario based on his contract structure. I don't really expect Hossa to hang around and play for $1 million when he's 38+ either.
No worries about Hossa specifically. He's a prime candidate for just stashing on the LTIR ala Pronger.
You have to admit that it is at least a plausible scenario based on his contract structure. I don't really expect Hossa to hang around and play for $1 million when he's 38+ either.
He's still under 40 during that period and could be looking for another shot at a cup around that time which could be a steal for a contending team. That is if his play doesn't slip off the face of the planet.
You have to admit that it is at least a plausible scenario based on his contract structure. I don't really expect Hossa to hang around and play for $1 million when he's 38+ either.
It's also plausible that Khabibulin retires this year. I don't know how many goaltenders are still trying to play at 40+, but I know it's relatively a lot more than skaters.
And on the flipside, it's also plausible that Luongo finishes out the duration of his contract because he, you know, loves playing hockey and making money.
It's also plausible that Khabibulin retires this year. I don't know how many goaltenders are still trying to play at 40+, but I know it's relatively a lot more than skaters.
And on the flipside, it's also plausible that Luongo finishes out the duration of his contract because he, you know, loves playing hockey and making money.
I doubt he would force himself on a team that doesn't want him, though. I could see him asking to be traded to a cap floor team to be a veteran backup for the last few years of his contract, if he doesn't want to retire then.
And on the flipside, it's also plausible that Luongo finishes out the duration of his contract because he, you know, loves playing hockey and making money.
That's more likely to happen if he's injury free and playing well, which would be a huge benefit to whichever team he was on. In 10 years that 5.3m isn't going to look like much and the 1m in real money might be less than the league minimum.
I doubt he would force himself on a team that doesn't want him, though. I could see him asking to be traded to a cap floor team to be a veteran backup for the last few years of his contract, if he doesn't want to retire then.
It's all conjecture at this point. The only real evidence we have is Luongo's words where he indicated that he didn't see himself playing out the contract. Of course it's possible he could change his mind but I think it's a pretty low risk.
Even in that scenario you've got a goalie making peanuts in the last three years of the contract who would be a great pick up for a team with lots of cap room.
I doubt he would force himself on a team that doesn't want him, though. I could see him asking to be traded to a cap floor team to be a veteran backup for the last few years of his contract, if he doesn't want to retire then.
It's all conjecture at this point. The only real evidence we have is Luongo's words where he indicated that he didn't see himself playing out the contract. Of course it's possible he could change his mind but I think it's a pretty low risk.
Even in that scenario you've got a goalie making peanuts in the last three years of the contract who would be a great pick up for a team with lots of cap room.
I really doubt he said it that candidly, and I don't remember any such suggestion coming from him in regards to his early retirement. If he had said that, it would have been enough proof to have the contract voided by the NHL when it was under investigation.
The point is, he might have every intention to retire in 7 or so years, but there is zero concrete facts to support it and as such, any competent GM would never assume that is to be the case. Therefore, the argument is invalid on the grounds that only an idiot GM would factor this into account during trade valuation.
The new CBA offer might impose a retirement cap hit on the signing team, but this impacts nobody but the Canucks and does zero for his value.
I really doubt he said it that candidly, and I don't remember any such suggestion coming from him in regards to his early retirement. If he had said that, it would have been enough proof to have the contract voided by the NHL when it was under investigation.
The point is, he might have every intention to retire in 7 or so years, but there is zero concrete facts to support it and as such, any competent GM would never assume that is to be the case. Therefore, the argument is invalid on the grounds that only an idiot GM would factor this into account during trade valuation.
The new CBA offer might impose a retirement cap hit on the signing team, but this impacts nobody but the Canucks and does zero for his value.
6 years of elite-to-good goaltending at a great cap-hit would make a lot of GMs willing to take the risk he'll either retire or be willing to be traded to a cap floor team, imo.
6 years of elite-to-good goaltending at a great cap-hit would make a lot of GMs willing to take the risk he'll either retire or be willing to be traded to a cap floor team, imo.
It won't be a risk, because they wouldn't bank on him retiring. This goes back to my previous post. No GM is going to valuate Luongo on the premise that he's going to retire in 6-7 years. They're going to look at the contract, and valuate Luongo based on the entire term. If Luongo retires years after they trade for him, then depending on the goaltending situation, it could either be a very good or very bad thing (Lidstrom is a good example).
Any team looking to negotiate a trade for Luongo is going into those negotiations under the premise that he will be playing out his whole contract not only for leverage, but because there is nothing written that states he must or will retire. This is why this argument is invalid.
I really doubt he said it that candidly, and I don't remember any such suggestion coming from him in regards to his early retirement. If he had said that, it would have been enough proof to have the contract voided by the NHL when it was under investigation.
The point is, he might have every intention to retire in 7 or so years, but there is zero concrete facts to support it and as such, any competent GM would never assume that is to be the case. Therefore, the argument is invalid on the grounds that only an idiot GM would factor this into account during trade valuation.
The new CBA offer might impose a retirement cap hit on the signing team, but this impacts nobody but the Canucks and does zero for his value.
Any competent GM who would be interested in acquiring Luongo would want to speak to him directly before making any trades. This is a veteran player with a NTC, and a big contract commitment, any GM who has any interest would be foolish not to talk to him about playing on their team, in their city. And any competent GM would discuss his contracts, future plans and retirement with him.
This is close to $50 mill asset you're buying. In most cases, I'd assume that ownership would speak to him directly before pulling the trigger on any trade.
You don't make such trades based on assumptions. I can't see any NHL level GM, or ownership group for that matter, not having a one-on-one with Luongo and get as much information on his future intentions as possible. That will factor into his overall value to them, and the return the Canucks could get.
I really doubt he said it that candidly, and I don't remember any such suggestion coming from him in regards to his early retirement. If he had said that, it would have been enough proof to have the contract voided by the NHL when it was under investigation.The point is, he might have every intention to retire in 7 or so years, but there is zero concrete facts to support it and as such, any competent GM would never assume that is to be the case. Therefore, the argument is invalid on the grounds that only an idiot GM would factor this into account during trade valuation.
The new CBA offer might impose a retirement cap hit on the signing team, but this impacts nobody but the Canucks and does zero for his value.
It was well past the date of the investigation. And yes he was quite candid.
A smart GM will talk to Luongo and will assess the risks of him playing out his contract and based on past players will see that it is low. Most smart GM's make decisions based on assessing the risks all of the time. The ones that act like deer in the headlights when ever there is a risk are not successful.
The reality is that under the proposed CBA a significant risk of Luongo retiring has been removed. It's obvious his value has gone up.
